Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Today's Build Failed UEFI Security Check A.K.A. Secure Boot!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Algonquin, IL USA
    Beans
    672
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Today's Build Failed UEFI Security Check A.K.A. Secure Boot!

    Just FYI.
    2013 Dell Inspiron 15 3521 Laptop, 2010 Dell Inspiron 1012 Mini Net Book, 2010 Dell Inspiron Zino HD 400, Sprint Samsung Galaxy S4, and Apple IPad Mini WIFI Only.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Algonquin, IL USA
    Beans
    672
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Today's Build Failed UEFI Security Check A.K.A. Secure Boot!

    Forgot to mention the following: Daily-Live AMD 64 Build from cdimage dot Ubuntu dot com.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Williams Lake
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Today's Build Failed UEFI Security Check A.K.A. Secure Boot!

    Quote Originally Posted by kevpan815 View Post
    Forgot to mention the following: Daily-Live AMD 64 Build from cdimage dot Ubuntu dot com.
    You can add the full url here, you don't have to obfuscate them with dots.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Algonquin, IL USA
    Beans
    672
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Today's Build Failed UEFI Security Check A.K.A. Secure Boot!

    OK, Thanks, however it some of the Other Beta Forums (Non-Ubuntu) that I post in, Leaving the Full Website in the Post is Against the Rules on those other Non-Ubuntu Websites, so I do have to be careful as each of the different Forums has their own Rules.
    2013 Dell Inspiron 15 3521 Laptop, 2010 Dell Inspiron 1012 Mini Net Book, 2010 Dell Inspiron Zino HD 400, Sprint Samsung Galaxy S4, and Apple IPad Mini WIFI Only.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    London, England
    Beans
    6,797
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Today's Build Failed UEFI Security Check A.K.A. Secure Boot!

    Did someone forget to sign the kernel? This is on the same machine that other ISO images have been tested on?

    Last year the Ubuntu developer working on secure boot expressed concern that OEMs would not implement the Microsoft specification in the way that they should. Some parts of the specification were listed as "recommended" and not "required."

    I am not against links to web sites or wiki pages. What I think of as very bad manners are links that begin a download straight away without any warning of it going to happen or without giving me an option to refuse. I class that at the least as anti-social behaviour. At the worst it is ...

    Regards.
    It is a machine. It is more stupid than we are. It will not stop us from doing stupid things.
    Ubuntu user #33,200. Linux user #530,530


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •